Skip to main content

About your Search

20110301
20110331
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
afghanistan. but first, remarks on u.s. nuclear plan safety. >> i am asking specifically if an earthquake hit the power plan and georgia, based on your agency's review of their safety design, would it withstand that earthquake? >> all of the plants we are currently reviewing, will meet strict safety standards for earthquakes. for existing plants, we believe they can withstand an earthquake. in the new plants, we have not completed our review. i do not want to prejudge the outcome of that. >> but you are allowing this plan and georgia to be contstructed. >> it is a preliminary approval. that is not related to safety significance services at this time. >> in general, for each plan and the united states, regardless of where it is located, doesn't have a minimum safety requirement to withstand an earthquake? >> that is true. all the plants have a requirement to be designed to deal with the kinds of earthquakes we would expect in a 200 miles radius. >> if a plant is in an area more prone to earthquakes, it might have a higher requirement than one in an area that has not had an
the situation we are not going to mention any nation that we are using. we will let those countries make those announcements. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> president obama continues his trip in latin america. tomorrow, he is in santiago, chilly. you can see his speech live tomorrow about 3:30 p.m. eastern. >> joining us on "newsmakers," the chair of the nuclear regulatory commission appointed by president obama. thank you so much for being with us. "the new york times", and steve powers, energy reporters. you will get a status report on japan tomorrow. what you think you learn? guest: we will have a meeting with the full commission on the nrc. we will have a brief discussion on what kind of impact radiation could have for the public, and then we will take a look at some things, kind of a plan for a plant for how we intend to go forward and what kinds of things we may need to look at for u.s. nuclear reactors. host: with the fukushima plant in particular, at two of the six reactors are under control. japanese
us from somerset. welcome. >> good to be with you. >> we have to reporters with us to help us with questioning. >> good to be with you. i wanted to ask, the vice president went to the hill to jump-start talks on how to fund the government through the end of the year, dispatched by president obama. you were not in the meeting. i wonder if you expected to be invited or does that tell you anything about the pace or tenor of the big initiations going on right now? >> i am glad the president is involved finally. i think it is very helpful to have the vice-president on the hill, his old stomping grounds. this was an elected leadership meeting on the part of the house and senate and i am glad they're at. >> do you think they're likely to make progress bridging the divide between house republicans who have asked for $61 billion of cuts from the budget and democrats here have said they want a freeze for this year's budget or maybe $10 billion under that? >> that's just it. we did not know what the senate has in mind. i believe in regular order and we have passed are built on the house
. tomorrow on "washington journal" will focus on the developing story in libya. joining us -- mike baker will give us his perspective on the u.s. involvement in libya and what it means with regards to the cia. also flood insurance. some of the issues and topics on "washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m.. thank you for being with us on sunday morning. enjoy the rest of your weekend and i hope you have a great week ahead. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> next "newsmakers "with cecile richards from planned parenthood. then senate majority leader trent lott discuss senate reform. after that, new york congressman anthony wiener talks about the health care law. >> this week we are joined by cecile richards, the president of the plan pater -- km federation here to talk about what could be a debate next week when congress returns. this debate between republicans and democrats over whether or not there should be federal funding for planned parenthood. walk us through from your perspective what this is about for you
to us last year alone and we did about 830,000 breast exams and more than a million pap smears. in many parts of the country what we have been hearing from thousands of women since the house made this decision in many parts of the country planned parenthood is the only provider of basic women's health care. 72% of our health care centers are either in rural america or medically underserved communities. we're a vital provider to men and women each year. >> we are in an era in washington when there is a phenomenal debate going on over the scope of government and what's the appropriate size and scope of the federal government. $300 million for family planning may not be a grand and out of money in the scope of they $three trillion federal budget, but why should the federal government be in the business of paying for these kinds of services? why is that something that should be the role of the federal government? >> it hasn't for more than 40 years. when this move was made by the house leadership, which took a lot of folks by surprise because it was such a dramatic, and eliminating all
of republicans for tax reform. joining us is jonathan allen and eric watson, budget policy reporter for the hill. thanks to all three of you for being here. before we get to the other guest tozz speak to you, i wanted to bring up today's q & a published in the "the washington post" with you today. is says you are a committed tax opponent but you see a new dynamic in politics. what are you seeing out there? >> there are two things. in d.c., there is gridlock because the republican- controlled house of representatives don't have to pass a legislation that president obama doesn't like. present obama doesn't have to sign a thing that the republicans wish to enact and the senate is divided against itself. there are 41 democrats willing to filibuster anything reasonable and there are 41 republicans willing to filibuster anything unreasonable. each has their own definition of what is reasonable. there is a certain limitation to what can happen in d.c. obama can get new spending programs and the republicans have a hard time rolling them back things that are already low. it is as if you had two sumo wres
this calendar year, which would take us into partly 2012 spending. some thought it meant only in the 2011 fiscal year. so that was the difference in interpretation. the freshmen believed, and they ran on the promise that they would do that in this fiscal year. so we had a conference. those different interpretations were discussions. it was concluded by leadership and the conference that we would do it in this fiscal year. so we went back to the drawing boards on the appropriations committee and we came up with those numbers to cut the $100 billion off the current fiscal year. >> what did that tell you about your conference about what is possible with your conference the way it is currently constituted this year in terms of how you need to be putting together spending bills in the future, and how would you apply this to this negotiation that's going on right now? >> well, you know, we have 87 freshman republicans in the house, a very, very impressive group of young men and women. they ran campaigns that were focused on the deficit by and large. so there's is the freshest view point in the congres
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)